SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Ker) 578

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
Thomas – Appellant
Versus
Sudha – Respondent


Advocates appeared: For the Appellant:C.K. Vidyasagar, P. Chandy Joseph, Advocates. For the Respondent:T. Krishnan Unni, Sr. Advocate.

Judgment :

These appeals arise from a common judgment rendered in three appeals by the Additional District Judge, Thodupuzha, which in turn, arose from the common judgment in three suits rendered by the learned Sub Judge, Kattappana.

2. Three suits, O.S.No.118 of 1996, O.S.No.129 of 2001 and O.S.No.130 of 2001, in which, common questions of fact and law arose for adjudication, were jointly tried by the learned Sub Judge, Kattappana. O.S.No.118 of 1996 was a suit for declaration of title and injunction. The plaintiffs in that suit are the appellants in R.S.A.No.666 of 2007. They have preferred the above appeal challenging the dismissal of their suit O.S.No.118 of 1996 after it being confirmed by the lower appellate court dismissing their appeal, A.S.No.2 of 2002, by the learned Additional District Judge, Thodupuzha. These appellants have filed another suit as O.S.No.130 of 2001 in respect of the very same subject matter covered by O.S.No.118 of 1996, in which a decree of injunction was applied for against the common 1st defendant but, with two others as co-defendants. The common 1st defendant in the above two suits O.S.No.118 of 1996 and O.S.No.130 of 2001 had filed the other suit O.









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top